Another way to determine the applicability of retractable films is to look into the past and find some similar situations. Perhaps the most fundamental analogy with cases of shrinkage in the law is the well-known case of the ticket. While there is no real “new” technology for transportation tickets (although atMs are a form of ATMs), the cases are a useful example of how the law has dealt with undisclosed conditions. In these cases, an offer is made to conclude on terms referred to in a separate document or note. The acceptance of the contract and the conditions stated is the retention of the ticket.  In such cases, buyers do not have the prior opportunity to read the terms. An analysis by this authority shows that ticket cases probably do not support the applicability of retractable films (although this is far from clear). Another problem with this decision is that, in reality, a distributor or retailer acts as an intermediary between the software manufacturer and the buyer. The contract is between the buyer and the distributor, not the buyer and the software manufacturer. Lord Penrose solved this problem on the basis of the idea of a treaty that would give rights to third parties (jus quaesitum tertio). This term is particularly broad in Scottish law and would not be appreciated in another common law country. Perhaps an extension of the tacit licensing law would work to solve the problem of awarding contracts between two parties.  However, the Court left open the possibility of enforcing retractable packaging that offered buyers the opportunity to return products if they did not accept the terms of the licence.
 There have been a number of major Australian government initiatives dealing with electronic contracts and new technologies. The main initiative was the report of the expert group on e-commerce to the Attorney General, e-commerce: implementation of the regulatory framework (`ECE report`). Its results focused on a number of issues related to the development of an infrastructure to support e-commerce in general.  Since the purchaser is not aware of the conditions (which generally include restrictions on the distribution and copying of software) when accepting the terms of the offer, the validity of the license is at issue.  The key question for shrunken films is whether it is legal to direct a person to terms they do not know in a contract. Often, the terms of the agreement are included under the small print film. Alternatively, the pressure may mean that the conditions of use are in the field. The difficulty here lies in cases such as the sale of phones or when the actual terms of the agreement are included in the box.  There was almost no judicial authority over click wraps anywhere in the world.